Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

THE HOBBIT - watching now @ ...

There are no 4K Hobbits. Only upsampled 2K on 4K projectors.
 
Lucky bast... I have to wait until friday due to a friend is working. We have to stick with 2k 3d 48fps aswell. Have fun!
 
Afaik the combo 4k/3d/dcp is non-existent. Odemax/redray...???:-)

2d/3d 24 fps
3d 48 fps
And a bunch of IMAX 2d/3d formats, none of which states resolutionbase, but as IMAX digital projection is currently 2k (as far as I have been able to dig up) I guess it is a good bet to say that those are 2k, as I can see no mentioning of an analogue IMAX copy.

Then there is 24fps to 2d film, which may or may not come from a 4k master... No specific as to that?

And you have versions with dolby 64 chnl surround at select theatres, with any of the image combos above...

No mention of a 4k/24 or 48 dcp, that I have seen...

Actually, with the glasses and contrast-loss involved in 3d screenings, the benefits of 4k are currently significantly less than for a 2k screening....

Redray may change all that, but that is for us to see.

Wouldn't be surprised to see a 48fps/4k odemax master of the hobbit when that arrives. Just because "they can"....
 
A friend of mine bought the IMAX tickets instead of HFR. When he changed it, the price was actually cheaper to watch it in HFR than IMAX. I doubt either of them are projected with a 4k source, though.
 
Max Nguyen said:
A friend of mine bought the IMAX tickets instead of HFR. When he changed it, the price was actually cheaper to watch it in HFR than IMAX. I doubt either of them are projected with a 4k source, though.
Click to expand...

Yup - the 24fps and HFR Real-D versions are actually the same price, so at least they're not using HFR as another reason to raise ticket prices.
 
Detlev Eller said:
... there seems to be myths and storymaking in the air ... ;-)

so, looking for an official clarification of the matter, having confusion in the market does not help anyone
Click to expand...

From what I read here on the forum and other places the film was posted in 2k so 4k showings are upsampled copies at best, realtime upsampled in projector copies at worst from what I understand.
 
Björn Benckert said:
From what I read here on the forum and other places the film was posted in 2k so 4k showings are upsampled copies at best, realtime upsampled in projector copies at worst from what I understand.
Click to expand...

... projectionist said: "we show it in 2k, because we see no difference" .... which made me chuckle, but if they never had the "right" master, it makes sense, just that statements like this feed the wrong horses, usually ripple through the audience, gets to press and overall do not help.

Would be good, to have a public release statement about the various formats ... i am not even sure anymore, if there was ever a 4k version announced for release ... ;-) ...
 
Gunleik Groven said:
If there is a 4k/3d/hfr version comming up, it needs odemax to play...
Click to expand...

Word. If nothing else, that would be the reason to buy ~$10K Red Projector or RedRay+Odemax if you have 4K screen already. Also in a year and half they could re-render the movie at 4K and do two-film marathon in cinemas before There and Back Again... Just sayin'.
 
Depending on screensize and glasses, it isn't obvious that 4k will have the sam extra impact on 3d as in 2d.

Many things in the signalchain to factor in...
 
Detlev Eller said:
Would be good, to have a public release statement about the various formats ... i am not even sure anymore, if there was ever a 4k version announced for release ... ;-) ...
Click to expand...

The only 4K version that exists is in some alternate universe. I am confident that PJ will go back and re-do the whole LOTR franchise in 4K after the last film is released because it not only makes sense to do so for the purposes of having definitive HQ masters and because the Ring trilogy is in dire need of a full post re-do given the age of the films and progression of the technology. WB could essentially re-release the whole franchise into theaters over a year and make craploads of money if that ever happens.
 
the only way they will do 4k is through uprez....

if the vfx was finished 2k...then it was rendered at 2k.....and 3d

to jump to 4k the render farm will take 4 times as long plus it is in 3d so really 8 times as long....

and these are not simple renders....

in LOTR...the tree beard scenes took as much as 24-48 hours per frame to render...that was 24 2k frames no 3d...now make that 48 and 3d and you are quadrupling the time...make it 4k and you are 16 times that (it was a while ago however...would not take nearly that long now)

the scale of re rendering vfx to 4k then re comping the whole thing....and performing another grade would probably be in the tens of millions...

not to say it wont happen in the future....but even then I bet we would see just a very HQ uprez

heres a quote from PJ on the rendering cost factor in just being allowed to shoot 48
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...bit-Peter-Jackson-defends-new-technology.html

"When we asked the studio if we could shoot 'The Hobbit' at 48 fps, we promised the budget would be the same. But it actually does have a cost implication because you've got to render twice as many frames and the rendering takes more time. The fact that we owned Weta and could absorb that in-house was actually part of the reason we were able to do the 48 frames."
 
... saying it takes more resources to create a higher quality experience is no argument for a visionary ... and i take it from a PJ interview/ video statement - that he'd like to create an elevated cinematic experience to bring people back to the theaters ...

anyhow, render times and such is just a numbers game, no big deal when put into perspective of the whole enterprise and market, this is not our regular post house job, remember ... ;-)

actually, i would expect the "per frame rendertimes" to go up exponentially, see layers, details, structures, texture maps, passes ... and what not, it is not a simple math derived from looking at output rez.

however, i was under the impression, we will see a 4k hobbit and enter into the age of 4k collectivly ....
lets not talk about uprezing, it is completely beside the point and insulting anyone on reduser ... lol ... ;-)


delivery is another topic, as long as there is no odemax, guess sneaker net drives may do ... question is: does a 4k master exist or is it in the making or not.

so, still looking forward to a public statement (from the source) ... maybe a "release production note with a 4k outlook", if that would be an option, Mr. J. ... ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top